New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-03-23
HATEFUL HOURS FOR CLEARY
Continued From First Page.

tailed and circumstantal story. Neither Fullgraf
Both had made confessions at times wide apart neither
knowing what the other had sad and yet their accounts
agreed almost entirely The trivial differences only made
the of the body OF the apparent what they
told was a detailed. welknt statement with all the In
trnsc marks Of truth Counsel for the defence had al
taskIng them only so far they concerned Cleary.
Was the evidence not probable in view Of the state OF
in the Board Of Aldermen had been
out the and eSs' here m nrned
Mr. Nco or The fiery counsel for the defence objected
pSy tue and TSga had already sn the
test of three trials Judge Barrett made no ruling at
Quoting the prosecution with great fairness. " rule
that you make no more Interruptions just now added
MT Nicoll then over the testimony corroboratiye
OF Duffy and Fullgras story the extraordinary record
the flight of keenan,, Moloney, Dempsey, DeLacy and
the rest Katie Metzs evidence and Clearys own failure
man. Clearys defence the stand that he had al
ways been In favor of road In Broadway; brt
out giving the least consideration TO the resti Cearys
not caring to why the meeting called. could only
have been the result OF his already knowing everything
Judge Barrett ruled ont reference to the unpleasant
ness OF prosecuting former political friend ne saa
feature Of tie trial. the abuse OF robusons pefiwig
pared fellow who tore passion 20 taers 10 eaten re
and half recess having been taken from 6J" 10 80
THE JUDGES CHARGE
After Mr. Nicoll concluded. Justice Jarrett, who had
been carefully reading seventy special charges to
the Jury asked for by Cearys counsel stated that such
Of them he thought proper he would embody in his
charge which he then entered upon, at $40 p M, as
follows:
GENTLEMEN OF IHE JURY You have now heard all the
learned counsel in the case the opening address o. the eK
city aud The exceedingly eloquent an powerful ADDE'S OF
ing lastly yon address OF the fair
% sn ana e Sos Ana no NV word is
be 'f the e a 'na ia ,' Sa the
1on naturally almost necessarily lean on an impartial
and the Idle for suggest that yon must accept
IRON III s soSd TS not ask so neseni and
hgmnfed jury you to approach this case III SOBER ana
Bribery is an syceFtional crime r mot only .dycsi1
in the Constitution The law makes provision
other crimes But The people deem proper not TO @
they have RATED it INTO tie organic law Aid Be
that H. the which placed tins crime in the Constitution OF
@ matt T a the bsS hc S SsS % me-
ment which EXISTS for the peoPe cWn, uy i 1ii a
cankcr worm vals and no corruption can be
enno ae ro q believe That he learned right
in stating how rampant It has become-Du II 1ecome 80
ms differs from other crime, IN this In bribery
murder len assanii true tia! The wassly o, The
affected by te murder theft who eonvic
ton But in bribery there IS no one person e'psea ~ &
How easy let IT drop out OF sight The
incentive so YOU see ecrtemen am doing more than
duty In asking approach tins case IA the SoD'es'
i other hand must be e1..ednsly carsl1 While
popular clamor {" affect our Judgment great
Won ac ls nnt believe ought to ay at the
which has been so fofeib almost Of pop
ular camor L. my Judgment somewhat eNatgetLte,
popular clamor winc demands the CONVECTION OF
OF csno that no guilty shall be allowed TO escape con
yoon Ihst believe hs a s oT al Is done % '
ct me Sntion y9n tsainst eel-f , o nv , Shcr We
regret ne misfortune % imly and inc isl 81 one
Sow the specific charge n The Indictment The
aefced 10 accept bnbe from pfison unSH ~ ,,
cy upon measnre pending before that body. Tor oe.'rSs
money II the prosecution prove TIE receipt OF
money. that fact bearing on The case TIE ggssaon u
and # II ~ no consequence for thu purposes Of the case
whether defendant received money 81 not me I'a'on
you viii 80 At ror s dspse ,e ACCEPT money and
hen ". cheated ont df Suppose money plae WIN
a hirl person who Tel away Noail he De lcs, gum ~
other be any the less guilty. Certainty The essence OF
bribery whether consumnaed or not ON ms
s , ,do5 1sy to k DOUBT fae law
evidence II does beyond any doGo. ~, dhsIe
province but Of the Deity II must be n.
being c1amncdhe cannot satisfy his reason that 'here
scarcely think II necessary thai such agreement
may be- IN Writing nor need be proved 10y I1
pfoveG BY Were ocr Jaw 10 prevala
81 having clear probave value evidence Of
%S may be inferred In The ike ms
the 'are rle o. law ws appA1, TO p ccssgy e nrTe
that met particular day and That was near 70
offer sun OF money na Sa' lner "O hat such
an agreement was made right 10 infer T. II does
not follow brber and the 9fiOe must be brought
acc To- ace hai II theif minds mGe, t me frt % thew were
T. Won e,ievs fusrad duffy then there are those con
siefa,Ions II the these thirteen Aldermen took
place testified By FuigIaf and Duny ana some one
w SnS int oscr % s5oo6oo by an oppcsss
nfax kan | leave
rsn, s AZ those meeting. and silent and
pressed dissent there az part snu pace 81 VIC
scheme leave TO 10 determine "hether an agree
Sow SSas@ee r, Of law govern MOI only THE The
question Of guilt but the consideration Oh tnS I
soasniu9n rI immunity T to sccomplces who
zen tX defined rules lie has him tue protection o.
rules Which nSyS o1y Eon the
There me iG soaSt the defendant have
sci. wants no one eonNiutsu t 80 m, III
s S" to is he srT SroSectSd The simple easy
and clear The public officer who accused IL TO De indeed
n the light rseora Is there , as % sa be-
presumed innocent M We DO take the evidence
aud lighted up ths I"s r ' That innocsnc@
snn.aTs IL is here crime nearly always detected
by of the accused me person Low il in his con-
SeI' Ts facts way guilt aPpart
Quicker Of proiscon there arc his acts rs sw1rS
cutting him down II ug , V" $40 van believe that hun
v scs e. aid cut down Let him latter ana theh
m ,n Ias e,tene MI the evidence Of guilt follows MN
Ia, la indeed writes his own history anu Shmps
@ n hs ltfe so Won how the Constitution can Do
enforced citizens be proecteu . that n, ,be in
formers then what may call tine episode OF MISS ' E
,hs tcstmonv of Inc defence As 10 the tcshon1 VI
,nS unGy I should need 10 tell you ,nae :, .hG
law does not convict on, X uneol Won are sat
.ned of Inc drfcnaants guilt beyonu ony ~ an
,ar,a my couId convict the testimony Oh Al
acr"miier lave always been and am no" OF tIe uV
ar urors shoud always examine such oluo &c wiz,
c,rs There /. have always Oteh any ali
nov of lie opinion mattel no" naA 49, men ro
m, bs aronI I'M, accused that with twelVe gooI me" ~
au,unt OF soplitstry saWdus toWh ~ a t,,ey are
- the merits OF the
ire Sin from he people have clear minus ana a that Idees
of The than the Judges ulth'scl,." "'P~ 49,
viii never to Judge o NE u, ~ o,,i,otbv against
Iwill not say vOu even You h'No az n cenyot have
,,rsns n The arac er inf0rincrs ana YOU ~ ranr
n sfrnnu nm antipatly- you are uouh1 ~ ~ tba
h.ad. T., In, consider the bearing ar"
s',,o,r ~ Ter AN examination OF ths tcsi'|oh' ,nv
,nn,,vr. tLe vsy gwen and an aDo"t ~ Ill
fP az, t,,; IL ia substantially true ana shouiu
hen sav lfiongh we reached the truth ana ~ va e
,nln,a wi declare The IosutV s.orId